While on post, does state law apply?

2019-10-06T13:46:51-04:00

I have a soldier who is 19; he is romantically engaged to a 17 year old. He’s about to PCS to a state where it is illegal for them to have sexual contact (age of consent is 18, no Romeo/Juliet law). If they only have sexual contact while on post, (ucmj defines age of consent as 16) then are they safe?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2019 2:22 PM

2019-10-06T14:22:24-04:00

Any answer here will not provide any protection for the Soldier. He should seek legal counsel, explain every detail, and go with THAT legal advice.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Oct 6 at 2019 2:25 PM

2019-10-06T14:25:23-04:00

Your Soldier is in a difficult spot. If the couple is truly in a dedicated relationship, not just lust, then they should make it legal. It they were married, it probably wouldn't be a problem in any state. If he goes PCS and takes his girlfriend with him, he might be chargeable for transporting a minor across state lines for the purpose of elicit sexual activity. Recommend they talk to either a lawyer or Chaplin before traveling together to the new duty station.

Response by CPL Earl Kochis made Oct 6 at 2019 3:31 PM

2019-10-06T15:31:31-04:00

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States. Also remember it’s not the individual that presses the charges it’s the state therefore his best bet is to go to a lawyer and get a consultation!!

Ages of consent in the United States. - Wikipedia

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Oct 6 at 2019 3:43 PM

2019-10-06T15:43:54-04:00

If someone is trying to weave their way through different laws regarding sexual contact with a minor, they're really not in a good place. I would tell him that he needs to put that relationship on ice.

Response by PO3 Adam Stoflet made Oct 6 at 2019 3:51 PM

2019-10-06T15:51:37-04:00

Regrettably, I do not believe so, Long story short, he should not engage at all with her until they match the law for where they are at. UCMJ only defines it at 16 because a some states have laws that have it at 16 as well. It is not in relation to his military duties therefore he has no military protection in this case, atlest in my opinion.

Response by SSgt Devon Peeples made Oct 6 at 2019 4:45 PM

2019-10-06T16:45:11-04:00

Yes. It is applied through a congressional act. 1428 or something.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2019 6:43 PM

2019-10-06T18:43:51-04:00

if I do recall, military bases are required to abide by the laws of the state in which they are located. For example if somehow a service member could teleport onto fort drum with a personal 15 round magazine, they would still be in violation of state law even if the magazine never existed outside of federal property.

Response by Sgt John Steinmeier made Oct 6 at 2019 7:08 PM

2019-10-06T19:08:28-04:00

US Military Installations are governed under Federal Law. In some areas, primarily housing, there can be Concurrent Jurisdiction with local officials.

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made Oct 6 at 2019 8:02 PM

2019-10-06T20:02:52-04:00

If the parents file, they will file with the city or county. He could be playing with Fire. Take a break! Thank you for you service.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made Oct 6 at 2019 8:05 PM

2019-10-06T20:05:49-04:00

Trust me, I hear your point, honest...however, I assure you, to me, while it's an interesting theoretical question, certainly, with quite probably a good deal of case law yakking about it (and I'm obviously not an attorney, of course, nor would I ever even wanna be, only fools don't know their own limitations, I assure you), and I don't normally chime in on such things, that's all pure and simple quibble factor...that's just ultimate hair-splitting to my turn of mind...I mean, God knows, I could be wrong, however, that's just how I'd view the whole thing, honest...I just think that's one of those things he just shouldn't even wanna try testing out the waters on...I mean, it's just asking, begging for nothing but sheer unending potential aggravation, honest...if I were you, I'd just tell him to turn around, walk away ASAP and just leave the whole thing totally alone...period, zero, zip, nada, goose egg, cold turkey...believe me, when it's stuff like that, he just doesn't even wanna go there...all he'd need would be to have the parents say something, God forbid, and his career is gonna be totally down the tubes, PDQ, I assure you...theorizing about stuff like that, to me, is, candidly like running around Fat Man and Little Boy from Hiroshima and Nagasaki with a blowtorch, just begging for 'em to go off, to my mind, at least, for real, OK?

Response by Cpl Mark McMiller made Oct 6 at 2019 8:58 PM

2019-10-06T20:58:20-04:00

This is really a question for a lawyer. But many active-duty bases are federal military reservations. As such, if you are a civilian, you are subject to federal law while on base. If you are a military service member, you are subject to federal law and the UCMJ while on base. Regardless of what federal law states as the age of consent, The Mann Act, which is also federal law, outlaws interstate or foreign transport of "any person" for purposes of "any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2019 12:54 AM

2019-10-07T00:54:28-04:00

Plain and simple: She is a minor. Romantically engaged means nothing to the Army; its black and white, your married, single, or divorced.

He is a soldier and is subject to the UCMJ, but we are all subject to state laws as well...So I'll put it this way; you can legally smoke weed in Colorado, then you move to say Arizona where it is illegal, you can't keep smoking weed in AZ because it was legal in CO...You get what iIm saying?

Response by SSG Robert Perrotto made Oct 7 at 2019 5:26 AM

2019-10-07T05:26:05-04:00

this is so much more then just the age difference, a whole slew of laws, precedents, and legalities will be put into play by this. I would advise the SM to NOT engage in sexual activity with her until she reaches her majority (this right to vote, enter agreements without parental consent, ETC ETC). If the two are serious about their commitment to each other, a few months would be a small price to pay to avoid a host of legaities that the SM could potentially face.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Oct 7 at 2019 9:52 AM

2019-10-07T09:52:04-04:00

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2019 9:52 AM

2019-10-07T09:52:47-04:00

Speaking as a Father to a 15 year old girl....tell your Soldier to keep it in his pants until the girlfriend is 18. It will just save everyone lots of pain and legal anguish down the road. And if they can't survive together until she is 18, then they aren't going to survive after the SM PCSs.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2019 10:12 AM

2019-10-07T10:12:12-04:00

Get married or leave her behind.

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Oct 7 at 2019 1:07 PM

2019-10-07T13:07:31-04:00

What law applies depends on the post. Some are exclusive Federal, some are concurrent, which means that both Federal and State/Commonwealth law apply and some are proprietary which means State law applies. SJAFB is a proprietary base, for example. Fort Bragg is a combination, North of NC210 is Federal and South of NC 210 is Concurrent.

Response by SGM William Everroad made Oct 7 at 2019 2:28 PM

2019-10-07T14:28:07-04:00

SGT Private RallyPoint Member, Lots go good advice here. From consulting JAG to advising the SM to walk away are all good points.
At the end of the day, leaders not only have to counsel their Soldiers on regulation, what they 'can' or 'cannot' do, but also on what they 'should' or 'should not' do.
This is one of the latter cases. Even if they are covered legally (no legal advise contained in that statement), your young SM should not pursue any kind of relationship with a minor. SSgt Joseph Baptist, is right on target: date and wait. I might advise going a little further and just say write and wait simply because if they are already engaged in sexual congress, they aren't going to stop because you advise it.

Response by LCpl Jason Keiser made Oct 7 at 2019 11:54 PM

2019-10-07T23:54:10-04:00

ASK YOUR JAG OFFICE!

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Oct 8 at 2019 1:05 AM

2019-10-08T01:05:02-04:00

You should close down the Day Room Legal Clinic. UCMJ goes where you go, almost like AAFES. Your soldier is looking at various offenses including Art 134 under 2019 changes. Depending on elements of the contact, Art 120 and possibly Art 125.

There is also assimilated law where the installation adopts certain state statutes. There is also federal statute. https://ogc.osd.mil/php/docs/comparison_with_Title18_3-2-05.pdf

comparison_with_Title18_3-2-05.pdf

·ÐkÜ#ÁðeÔ |I{@200Ùiqª@ X!å7:^t-D@ %S endstream endobj 399 0 obj/W[1 1 1]/Type/XRef/Index[28 350]stream xÚbbf`b``Å3Î ÑøÅÃ; ù, endstream endobj 379 0 obj/LastModified(D:20050510101007)/MarkInfo endobj 381 0 obj/Font/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]/ExtGState/StructParents 0 endobj 382 0 obj endobj 383 0 obj endobj 384 0 obj endobj 385 0 obj endobj 386 0 obj[/ICCBased 398 0 R] endobj 387 0 obj endobj 388 0 obj endobj 389 0 obj endobj 390 0 objstream HSËnÛ0...

Response by SPC Andrew Virgil made Oct 9 at 2019 8:22 AM

2019-10-09T08:22:27-04:00

..............

Response by SP5 Joseph Ascanio made Oct 11 at 2019 6:44 AM

2019-10-11T06:44:48-04:00

No ones federal land the other is state land

Response by 1LT Jack Wheeler made Nov 22 at 2019 8:32 PM

2019-11-22T20:32:27-05:00

Post will assimilate the state laws that apply to that state.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2019 11:22 PM

2019-12-08T23:22:13-05:00

I’ve always always had the policy of “if I have to ask if this sex is legal, don’t have this sex”

It’s served me remarkably well in life

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Jul 13 at 2024 3:31 PM

2024-07-13T15:31:55-04:00

From my MP days, there are 3 types of posts or combinations thereof. Exclusive Federal, concurrent and proprietary. First State not involved, concurrent both State and Feds and proprietary State, Combinations could be like Bragg, exclusive North of 210 and concurrent South of 210. Due to some disputes with Feds, NC does not offer Feds exclusive anymore.